Let's not play into the Russians' hands.

[LAS14]

Last edited Tue Oct 23, 2018, 02:07 PM - Edit history (1)

But this time, prosecutors said the operatives appeared beholden to no particular candidate. Russia’s trolls did not limit themselves to either a liberal or conservative position, according to the complaint. They often wrote from diverging viewpoints on the same issue.

https://www.nytimes.com/2018/10/19/us/politics/russia-interference-midterm-elections.html

This is not exactly new news. I've heard it before, but I haven't heard the point so strongly emphasized as I did on some TV program recently. Rachel, maybe?

I hope DU will not fall for the kind of divisive behavior the Russians are trying to foment. I have two specific suggestions. Do the rest of you have other suggestions for not furthering the Russian agenda?

1 - Respond to a poster's questions instead of questioning their motives.

A little over a week ago there was a post entitled "Kirsten Gillibrand for President."
https://www.democraticunderground.com/100211280220 It listed a lot of qualities the poster thought were in her favor. Of the direct responses, most were answers to the implied question, which is good, but at least eight impugned the author's motive in posting. Even if something is posted by a Russian troll, if it's not removed by the Admins, then let's take the no drama Obama route and just reply with good information.

2 - Don't use the word "all" to apply to any group unless it is defined by it's name. Don't talk about "all Trump supporters." Do talk about "all people who yelled 'Lock Her Up'."

Thoughts?

[ck4829]

1. Just because Putinists have picked sides, doesn't mean you shouldn't

Yes black lives matter, yes confederate statues need to come down, yes Muslim Americans are Americans. Even though Putinists are trying to inflame these issues, it doesn't mean we have to ignore them.

Don't ignore Russians; a Russian liberal, critic of Putin, is not our ally... no, they are our brothers and sisters in resistance. We need to stay informed on the resistance to Putin as well as support the efforts to rein his regime in, like with the Magnitsky Act.

Don't be OK with corruption, nepotism, etc. In fact, we should hold Democrats to a higher standard than Republicans.

We need to differentiate between those who have inadvertently retweeted/liked something a Putinist said and those who are actively and knowingly pushing the Putin agenda... Michael Flynn is a clear example of the latter.

Finally, Russia is not omnipotent or omnipresent... efforts to divide us have existed before the 2016 election and were not done by Russia. It wasn't Putin who is always dividing the poor white man against the poor black man. It isn't Putin who is dividing heterosexuals against the GLBTQ community. It wasn't Putin trying to divide the private sector employees against public sector employees.

[stonecutter357]

2. you seem very concerned !

[LAS14]

4. Yes, I am! Why aren't you? nt

[W_HAMILTON]

3. The Russians and their trolls most certainly are beholden to a particular candidate:

Trump.

In all of the Russian troll farm messages listed in the most recent indictment, virtually none of them included direct and consistent comments against Trump. I think the closest I read was something where one said there would be riots if Trump fired Mueller -- that was the "worst" thing they said against Trump.

The Russian trolls attack whomever goes against Trump -- whether that be liberals or conservatives. They don't go after Trump and they don't go after politicians that are either directly or indirectly supporting Trump.

[Squinch]

5. I see nothing wrong with acknowledging the destructive motives of

long standing, consistent and obvious trolls. We do not owe it to them to justify our disgust with their repeated attempts to divide us.

[LAS14]

6. Just because someone feels passionately...

... about something and posts about it repeatedly does not mean their motive is division. You don't know what their motive is. You participate in the division by registering disgust at the question instead of answering it. Let's go "No drama Obama."

[LanternWaste]

7. Just because someone feels divisive...

... about something and posts about it repeatedly does not mean their motive is passion. You don't know what their motive is.

Let's go "Six of one, half a dozen of the other."

[LAS14]

9. Exactly!! You don't know what their motive is. Don't assume it's "to be divisive."

In a discussion forum, I think it's usually not.

[Squinch]

8. Watch our long standing trolls for a few years and their motives are

perfectly clear. If you can't see it yet, you will. And the fact that you can't see it yet is not a compelling reason for me or anyone else to be tolerant of their trollery.

How about you answer the way you want and I'll answer the way I want?

[LAS14]

10. Because the way you want is contributing to hyper-division in...

... our country, which the Russians are fomenting. Don't respond divisively (attacking their motives) and it won't have divided beyond differences of opinion.

[Squinch]

11. Are you really making demands about how I post on DU?

Do you really want to insist that you are the only one who knows how to post correctly and how to respond correctly to different posters? Is that really something you want to do?

[R B Garr]

12. +1, you are right Squinch, and this opposite world is getting really old. nt

[LAS14]

13. It's a discussion forum. I'm advocating for a position. I'm disagreeing....

... with you. I'm urging you to change your mind and not play into the hands of people who are willing to spend millions and millions of dollars just to foment the kind of personalized (as contrasted with discussion-based) division that attacking people for their (to you) unknown motives represents.

[Squinch]

14. You are instructing us on how to post. However I will continue to post as I deem appropriate.

That includes calling out trolls where I see them.

I will not show you the disrespect you have shown others, and will not make any demands to you about what and how you post.

[LAS14]

15. This is exactly what I'm talking about. You say I'm "instructing," a personally....

... pejorative word. I say I'm advocating for a position. A legitimate, respectful thing to do in a discussion forum.

[Squinch]

16. There is nothing intrinsically pejorative about the word "instructing."

It us a gerund with a specific meaning that accurately describes what you are doing.

[LAS14]

17. Well, I'm NOT (underlining, not yelling) "instructing." I'm arguing.

I have no position from which to instruct you. I'm not your teacher or your mother or anyone else. I'm simply arguing a position. You could argue back. You did when you said you didn't see anything wrong with being disgusted, etc. But our conversation has degenerated. So I'm withdrawing. Bye.